I like to observe and study salsa teachers, and by chance and serendipity I've lately been following with interest two salsa beginners' classes run by qualified ballroom Latin professional teachers and dancers. Both female.
As one would expect, they have been very good on frame, hold, correct stepping for 'latin motion', use of centre. And classy followers, exquisite turns, spins, decorative hands etc.
But on some other things: e.g. (On1):
- counting 1,2,3 .... 4,5,6 over the two four-beat bars (disconnecting from the beats in the music, as opposed to 123..567);
- sawing their arms about in open hold (breaks connection with partner);
- one of them taught that on the lady's forward basic step she leads the man, mirroring his lead to her on his forward step;
- instructing that an open-out was led by throwing the follower's hand backwards (moot point: there are better ways IMO);
- picking a hard-to-lead, mostly choreographed chachacha move to teach beginners in lesson 2.
- telling the ladies that their left arm can extend way behind the man's neck in closed hold (in AT-like manner) (IMO this restricts movement in salsa and isn't really the lady's decision... )
- on a cbl with single outside turn, leading the lady to turn on the 5 rather than the 6
What do you think about these?
I like the fact that salsa is a broad church with many different ways of doing things. But I fear that these observations only reinforced my view that as salsa is not a ballroom latin dance, ballroom latin experts can be inadvisable teachers if they are not also keen social salsa dancers. At least on the leading and following aspects that work freestyle, as opposed to choreographed and rehearsed movements.
I now recall also that in the first series of Strictly Come Dancing where salsa was introduced, series 3, the dances were hardly recognisable as salsa, and the judges' views of the dance were not in accordance with what we all see and love when salsa is danced well. When SCD started to contract salsa specialists such as Richard Marcel to advise on choreography, things improved greatly and SCD salsa can be of a high standard these days.
As one would expect, they have been very good on frame, hold, correct stepping for 'latin motion', use of centre. And classy followers, exquisite turns, spins, decorative hands etc.
But on some other things: e.g. (On1):
- counting 1,2,3 .... 4,5,6 over the two four-beat bars (disconnecting from the beats in the music, as opposed to 123..567);
- sawing their arms about in open hold (breaks connection with partner);
- one of them taught that on the lady's forward basic step she leads the man, mirroring his lead to her on his forward step;
- instructing that an open-out was led by throwing the follower's hand backwards (moot point: there are better ways IMO);
- picking a hard-to-lead, mostly choreographed chachacha move to teach beginners in lesson 2.
- telling the ladies that their left arm can extend way behind the man's neck in closed hold (in AT-like manner) (IMO this restricts movement in salsa and isn't really the lady's decision... )
- on a cbl with single outside turn, leading the lady to turn on the 5 rather than the 6
What do you think about these?
I like the fact that salsa is a broad church with many different ways of doing things. But I fear that these observations only reinforced my view that as salsa is not a ballroom latin dance, ballroom latin experts can be inadvisable teachers if they are not also keen social salsa dancers. At least on the leading and following aspects that work freestyle, as opposed to choreographed and rehearsed movements.
I now recall also that in the first series of Strictly Come Dancing where salsa was introduced, series 3, the dances were hardly recognisable as salsa, and the judges' views of the dance were not in accordance with what we all see and love when salsa is danced well. When SCD started to contract salsa specialists such as Richard Marcel to advise on choreography, things improved greatly and SCD salsa can be of a high standard these days.